This week I learned a lot of information, all from various sources. The most striking thing that I learned dealt with the different theories of how learning occurs within each of us as people. Constructivism, connectivism, and cyborg are all theories that try to explain how people learn or "construct" new knowledge.
Constructivism Theory has more to do with the theory that we never "learn anything from scratch". (Abbott, J. (nd). Building Knowledge: Contructivism in Learning. Youtube.com. Retrieved on Oct. 5, 2009, from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F00R3p0Xzuk) This video goes on to describe that learning occurs when you add new knowledge to a "framework" of knowledge that already exists within you. I have a few problems with this theory. Mostly that it implies a person is born with a certain knowledge building ability/disability. If we never learn anything that doesn't relate to something we already previously know, then we are almost saying that some are born with smarter "frameworks" than others. The only thing that varies in that theory is how much we add to the framework. I like the idea that we relate our knowledge to what we know and build from there, but I tend to lean toward the idea that people can increase their knowledge endlessly and are not tied to a "framework" of intelligence that we are born into. Siemens (nd), adds to this idea in the Connectivism video from this week by saying that this is only part of our knowledge. He says that we add to our knowledge and understanding not only by the knowledge that we construct, but also through the connections we make. (Siemens, G. (nd). The Changing Nature of Knowledge. Youtube.com. Retrieved on Oct. 5, 2009 from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YMcThndpzYg) These connections can be both internal and external. Internally it refers to the neuron connections in our brain and externally how we draw knowledge and learning from our social groups and connections to add to the internal connections of our brain. I like this theory a little more, and can see implications of it's relevance in students. Students with broader social networks tend to be more open to ideas, open to learning, culturally diverse, and have a broader background of knowledge than those from smaller less diverse social groups. The last theory from this week's videos, Cyborg Theory, is a little like listening to a sci-fi channel and part science experiment. The thought of humans relying on implants and cyborgenics for artificial intelligence to create a superior race of humans is somewhat frightening and disillusioned. (Warwick, K. (nd). Cyborg Life. Youtube.com. Retrieved on Oct. 5, 2009 from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RB_I7SY_ngI). Kevin Warwick's views on artificial intelligence and harnessing the power of the internet for raw data storage reminds of the student who wants to know why they can't just Google the answer. Just finding the data doesn't equate to learning or application of the knowledge. While computers can program and test scenarios, they lack the ability to think, consider, apply and make decisions. There is also the question of sensory overload. When is too much information, just too much. Our brains may not be able to handle the ability of adding endless numerous parameters into the decision making process. Will this make us intellectually superior as Warwick (nd) suggests, or just full of useless information? Who knows. I think that this is a future very very far from our reality.
Personally, I think the answer to how people learn lies somewhere in a balance between all of these theories. Students do connect learning to their prior knowledge, some of this knowledge is innate (don't touch the bright colored plant, it will hurt) and I think some of it is learned socially (don't talk back to your mother, she won't like it). Students, especially today, do rely on more than social networks and books to expand and add to the framework of knowledge. Google can be a great learning tool, so can social networking sites that allow students to create classrooms with worldwide boundaries. Does a classroom engaging in online learning with students who actually live in the African Savannah create a greater understanding of Ecology than those in a traditional classroom with just textbooks. Absolutely! I don't think the students' learning is just related to what they come to the table with, I think it is a sum of their genetic ability, neural networks, social networks, and the tools they use to learn.
Back to 5364 Reflections: Teaching with Technology Reflections
Week 1 Reflection:
This week I learned a lot of information, all from various sources. The most striking thing that I learned dealt with the different theories of how learning occurs within each of us as people. Constructivism, connectivism, and cyborg are all theories that try to explain how people learn or "construct" new knowledge.
Constructivism Theory has more to do with the theory that we never "learn anything from scratch". (Abbott, J. (nd). Building Knowledge: Contructivism in Learning. Youtube.com. Retrieved on Oct. 5, 2009, from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F00R3p0Xzuk) This video goes on to describe that learning occurs when you add new knowledge to a "framework" of knowledge that already exists within you. I have a few problems with this theory. Mostly that it implies a person is born with a certain knowledge building ability/disability. If we never learn anything that doesn't relate to something we already previously know, then we are almost saying that some are born with smarter "frameworks" than others. The only thing that varies in that theory is how much we add to the framework. I like the idea that we relate our knowledge to what we know and build from there, but I tend to lean toward the idea that people can increase their knowledge endlessly and are not tied to a "framework" of intelligence that we are born into. Siemens (nd), adds to this idea in the Connectivism video from this week by saying that this is only part of our knowledge. He says that we add to our knowledge and understanding not only by the knowledge that we construct, but also through the connections we make. (Siemens, G. (nd). The Changing Nature of Knowledge. Youtube.com. Retrieved on Oct. 5, 2009 from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YMcThndpzYg) These connections can be both internal and external. Internally it refers to the neuron connections in our brain and externally how we draw knowledge and learning from our social groups and connections to add to the internal connections of our brain. I like this theory a little more, and can see implications of it's relevance in students. Students with broader social networks tend to be more open to ideas, open to learning, culturally diverse, and have a broader background of knowledge than those from smaller less diverse social groups. The last theory from this week's videos, Cyborg Theory, is a little like listening to a sci-fi channel and part science experiment. The thought of humans relying on implants and cyborgenics for artificial intelligence to create a superior race of humans is somewhat frightening and disillusioned. (Warwick, K. (nd). Cyborg Life. Youtube.com. Retrieved on Oct. 5, 2009 from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RB_I7SY_ngI). Kevin Warwick's views on artificial intelligence and harnessing the power of the internet for raw data storage reminds of the student who wants to know why they can't just Google the answer. Just finding the data doesn't equate to learning or application of the knowledge. While computers can program and test scenarios, they lack the ability to think, consider, apply and make decisions. There is also the question of sensory overload. When is too much information, just too much. Our brains may not be able to handle the ability of adding endless numerous parameters into the decision making process. Will this make us intellectually superior as Warwick (nd) suggests, or just full of useless information? Who knows. I think that this is a future very very far from our reality.
Personally, I think the answer to how people learn lies somewhere in a balance between all of these theories. Students do connect learning to their prior knowledge, some of this knowledge is innate (don't touch the bright colored plant, it will hurt) and I think some of it is learned socially (don't talk back to your mother, she won't like it). Students, especially today, do rely on more than social networks and books to expand and add to the framework of knowledge. Google can be a great learning tool, so can social networking sites that allow students to create classrooms with worldwide boundaries. Does a classroom engaging in online learning with students who actually live in the African Savannah create a greater understanding of Ecology than those in a traditional classroom with just textbooks. Absolutely! I don't think the students' learning is just related to what they come to the table with, I think it is a sum of their genetic ability, neural networks, social networks, and the tools they use to learn.
Back to 5364 Reflections: Teaching with Technology Reflections